3.
City Council Work Session
- Meeting Date:
- 11/02/2026
- TITLE
- Animal Sheltering Services – Committee Recommendations
- PRESENTED BY:
- Kevin Iffland
- Department:
- City Hall Administration
Presentation:
Yes
Legal Review:
No
Project Number:
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Receive an update on the Animal Sheltering Committee and provide staff direction on the proposed scope of services, related City Code changes, RFP negotiations, and the previously discussed temporary YVAS agreement.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Animal Sheltering Committee has discussed a limited, City-funded sheltering model, potential code changes, and continued evaluation of a contracted provider through the existing RFP. Council direction is requested before staff proceeds further. The previously proposed month-to-month agreement with YVAS also remains unresolved.
Council directed staff in July to negotiate a temporary month-to-month agreement with YVAS while long-term options were evaluated. An agreement was negotiated but was not approved by Council or executed by the City. The prior YVAS contract expired June 30, 2026, and the City has since provided animal control and limited sheltering services.
Council directed staff in July to negotiate a temporary month-to-month agreement with YVAS while long-term options were evaluated. An agreement was negotiated but was not approved by Council or executed by the City. The prior YVAS contract expired June 30, 2026, and the City has since provided animal control and limited sheltering services.
BACKGROUND (Consistency with Adopted Plans and Policies, if applicable)
The committee’s general direction included:
• Limiting City-funded services to dogs at large, dangerous animals, injured animals, court-ordered holds, and lost or abandoned dogs, rather than full-service sheltering.
• Having the RFP committee complete its evaluation and negotiate with the successful proposer. An initial one-year period was discussed to assess costs, animal volumes, and performance. Any agreement would return to Council for approval.
• Preparing City Code amendments to reflect the limited service model, change applicable “Small Animals at Large” provisions to “Dogs at Large,” allow greater enforcement discretion for repeat violations rather than the current 48-hour provision, address a proposed 96-hour impoundment period before City ownership, and preserve authority for dangerous and injured animals and court holds.
• Considering use of the City’s existing facility by a contractor, with responsibilities for utilities, cleaning, maintenance, improvements, and shared Animal Control space defined in an agreement.
The committee’s discussion did not approve a contract or code amendments. Legal will finalize any proposed ordinance language. Council is also asked to clarify whether staff should continue pursuing or close out the previously negotiated month-to-month YVAS agreement.
• Limiting City-funded services to dogs at large, dangerous animals, injured animals, court-ordered holds, and lost or abandoned dogs, rather than full-service sheltering.
• Having the RFP committee complete its evaluation and negotiate with the successful proposer. An initial one-year period was discussed to assess costs, animal volumes, and performance. Any agreement would return to Council for approval.
• Preparing City Code amendments to reflect the limited service model, change applicable “Small Animals at Large” provisions to “Dogs at Large,” allow greater enforcement discretion for repeat violations rather than the current 48-hour provision, address a proposed 96-hour impoundment period before City ownership, and preserve authority for dangerous and injured animals and court holds.
• Considering use of the City’s existing facility by a contractor, with responsibilities for utilities, cleaning, maintenance, improvements, and shared Animal Control space defined in an agreement.
The committee’s discussion did not approve a contract or code amendments. Legal will finalize any proposed ordinance language. Council is also asked to clarify whether staff should continue pursuing or close out the previously negotiated month-to-month YVAS agreement.
FISCAL EFFECTS
No funding action is requested at this work session. Financial terms of any negotiated agreement, including facility responsibilities, would be brought back to Council before approval.
STAKEHOLDERS
ALTERNATIVES
Council may direct staff to proceed with the committee’s general approach, request revisions or additional information, or pursue a different sheltering model. Council may also provide separate direction on the proposed temporary YVAS agreement.